Trump administration inflicted serious military damage on Iran, yet the Iranian regime did not collapse, its nuclear program did not end, and Tehran did not back down. While the White House projects an image of “total victory” at home, the conversations taking place in Washington’s corridors tell a very different story. Trump is trapped between appearing strong and avoiding another large-scale war. What has emerged is a strange gray zone: the U.S. can neither fully withdraw nor completely finish the job. The most realistic scenario now appears to be a prolonged period of controlled crisis.
Over the past few weeks, a striking atmosphere has taken hold in Washington, D.C. Whenever President Trump and senior officials appear before cameras, they speak the language of victory. But behind closed doors, the conversations are very different. Because the Iran war is neither truly over nor fully ongoing. A strange gray area has emerged. No one wants to risk a new war, yet no one is willing to bear the political cost of stepping back. The process has effectively turned into a deadlock.
President Donald Trump once again struck a hard tone on Monday. He said the ceasefire was “on life support” and insisted that pressure on Iran would continue until Tehran completely abandoned its nuclear program. From the White House perspective, the conflict is still being presented as a “total victory.”
However, if you look at Washington’s diplomatic circles, an entirely different picture emerges. The American administration inflicted significant military damage on Iran, but failed to achieve its strategic objectives. The Iranian regime did not collapse. The nuclear program was not eliminated. Tehran did not retreat. On the contrary, a noticeable sense of confidence has emerged on the Iranian side.
To understand this, one only needs to look at Iranian media or the propaganda videos circulating on social media. The message Tehran is delivering to its domestic audience is clear: “America may be the world’s greatest power, but it could not force us into submission.”
Many experts in Washington now openly acknowledge this reality. The Strait of Hormuz issue, in particular, became the turning point. The U.S. deployed enormous military power to the region, yet it could not fully eliminate Iran’s leverage over the strait. Oil markets remain on edge. Gulf countries are deeply uneasy. Meanwhile, the White House fears the political consequences of rising energy prices at home.
What makes the situation even more complicated is that Trump is caught between anti-war Republicans and hawks demanding harsher military action. On one side are those arguing that Iran should receive a decisive, finishing blow. On the other are Republicans haunted by the traumas of Iraq and Afghanistan, warning that America is drifting into yet another Middle Eastern quagmire.
That dilemma defines Washington today. Iran is fully aware of it. This is why Tehran is playing for time at the negotiating table. The Iranian leadership no longer wants to return to the pre-war status quo. In fact, new rules regarding the Strait of Hormuz are now being discussed. Transit fees and even ideas resembling war reparations are reportedly being floated. This is part of Iran’s attempt to create psychological superiority. Just a few months ago, almost no one imagined Iran could reach a point where it might dictate terms to the United States. Today, however, the picture is far more complicated.
Another major topic being discussed in Washington is China. During Trump’s visit to China this week, the Iran file is expected to dominate discussions. After all, China is currently the country with the greatest economic influence over Tehran. It remains the primary buyer of Iranian oil. Having realized that direct military pressure alone cannot produce results, the White House is now trying to bring Beijing into the equation.
In many ways, this reveals the limits of American power. In the post-Cold War era, Washington typically managed crises on its own. Now, on the Iran issue, it finds itself needing China’s cooperation.
The White House’s biggest problem is this: Trump keeps telling the American public, “We won,” yet many experts in Washington see no clear victory. Yes, Iran’s navy suffered heavy damage. Missile infrastructure was targeted. Several military facilities were struck. But the Iranian regime remains intact. Its regional proxy forces have not been completely dismantled. And there is still no definitive outcome regarding the nuclear program.
As a result, the United States now finds itself trapped in a kind of half-war. It can neither fully withdraw nor completely finish the conflict. In recent days, experienced diplomats in Washington have increasingly repeated one phrase: “The parties are now trying to obtain at the negotiating table what they failed to achieve on the battlefield.”
That sentence perhaps captures the current reality better than anything else. In the Middle East, wars are sometimes won not on the battlefield, but through exhaustion. Iran is now testing precisely that strategy. Trump, meanwhile, must both appear strong and avoid another major war. For this reason, few in Washington expect a clear resolution anytime soon. The most realistic scenario is a prolonged period of controlled instability.
In other words, the war will not truly end, but neither will genuine peace begin.
